Man receives house arrest for sexually abusing his intellectually disabled sister
D.C. received two years less a day of house arrest and probation after being convicted on two counts of incest and one count of sexual assault.
Author: Alex Dhaliwal
An Ontario judge tossed the mandatory five-year prison term for a man who sexually assaulted his biological sister, instead imposing house arrest after finding the law unconstitutional and “grossly disproportionate” for offenders with intellectual disabilities.
The 26-year-old man, identified only as D.C., was charged in 2022 with sexually abusing his sister for four years beginning when she was 12, as first reported by the National Post.
“Five years in a penitentiary is a tough sentence in any circumstances, and even more so for a first-time offender. When a developmental disability is added to that mix, in my view it becomes cruel and unusual,” Justice Anne Molloy wrote in a recent decision.
The sister, too, is intellectually disabled. She informed a school counsellor in May 2022 of her abuse, prompting police involvement and charges against D.C.
The judge convicted D.C. of two counts of incest and one count of sexual assault, sentencing him to two years less a day of house arrest followed by three years of probation.
Admittedly, Justice Molloy said conditional sentences for child sex offences are “rarely appropriate,” but found one justified here, ruling it would not endanger the community.
After the sister informed a school counsellor of the sexual assaults in May 2022, the counsellor immediately contacted police, leading to charges against D.C., who is six years older than the complainant.
Owing to D.C.’s impaired intellectual and “diminished moral blameworthiness,” he received a more lenient sentence.
A defence expert testified that, despite being an adult, his intellectual disability left him with the cognitive functioning of a nine- to 12-year-old.
Dalhousie University law professor emeritus Wayne MacKay called it “extremely rare” for judges to bypass mandatory minimum sentences, saying the gap between a five-year prison term and house arrest is “striking” and could make the ruling ripe for appeal.
“I think most people would find that problematic,” MacKay told the Post, arguing house arrest for sexually assaulting a child under 16 and committing incest sends the wrong message about the seriousness of the offences.
Justice Molloy also acknowledged that incest is “one of the most heinous” sex crimes with lasting impacts, but doubled down on the lenient sentence.
“He recognized he had caused pain and trauma to his sister and said it would never happen again,” she wrote. “It seems to me that D.C. now has insight into what he did, and the pain he caused.”
However, an audio-recording of one of the sexual assaults depicts the complainant telling D.C. she was in pain and also telling him to stop. It was entered into evidence.
“She referred to him ‘just forcing it in.’ It is clear that D.C. heard these protests and that he nevertheless continued, if anything, with increased intensity,” the judge wrote.
Despite the girl’s repeated protests, D.C. continued, claiming she “needed to know how these things felt” before marriage and pregnancy. He sometimes gave her money and candy, while modelling the abuse on online pornography.
The graphic recording aside, the judge cited D.C.’s “genuinely remorseful” attitude and ruled counselling—not prison—best supported his rehabilitation given his cognitive limitations.
“I see great potential for rehabilitation with D.C. and I fear that sending him to prison would endanger, rather than enhance, his prospects for the future,” she wrote in her decision.
As part of his conditional sentence, D.C. must live with his grandmother, remain under house arrest for the first year except for work and approved appointments, and observe a curfew in the second year.